memory_alphafandomcom-20200223-history
Talk:Cardassian military
What Happened Is there any cannonical clue as to what happened to the Guard when the war ended.--UESPA 20:41, 30 March 2008 (UTC) :I could be wrong, but I don't believe so. The furthest we could go, I think, would be to say that the issue was dealt with in the treaty in the end of the war(which we saw signed). Not sure beyond that.--31dot 20:46, 30 March 2008 (UTC) ::There are next to no references to the Cardassians after the war ended (ie, in the last 2 seasons Voyager or Nemesis). --- Jaz 01:19, 31 March 2008 (UTC) ::: "None" works too. , was what we were left with. --Alan 01:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC) Removed text I removed the following speculation added by an anon editor: Possible numerical strength of average Order could fall anywhere from 500 000 to approx. 1 000 000 (these two numbers seem to be most possible). -- Renegade54 19:19, January 26, 2010 (UTC) Cardassian Guard If Cardassian Guard was used only once, it would be better to rename the article Cardassian Military, replace all references to the Guard with "the military" and retain merely the note in the article about the one reference to the Guard. The danger is that Cardassian Guard could mislead readers into using the name more frequently than the canon itself, resulting in a forcible (and in terms of frequency, non-canon) resurrection of a term that was never adopted by the writing staff, which was in charge of establishing such terminology for the canon. – NotOfTheBody 23:08, February 17, 2010 (UTC) :I think, though, that we should assume that Cardassian Guard is its real name and everything else was just a informal description. --Golden Monkey 00:04, February 18, 2010 (UTC) You cannot assume anything in an encyclopedia. I searched the "Emissary" script for "guard" and found only this reference to the Guard: "I am Gul Jasad from the Cardassian Guard, Seventh Order." contains an audio clip confirming that the wording wasn't changed in the final episode. Therefore, Cardassian Guard need not even be the same as the Cardasssian military - that is only an assumption made by whoever named this article. How do we know that it wasn't just a branch of the military, especially since it was never heard from again? Unless someone can come up with better evidence, the article must be renamed in order to avoid spreading myths. – NotOfTheBody 07:29, February 18, 2010 (UTC) ::What we should probably have is two separate pages. As you stated there's no proof it's the same as the military so why should this be moved to that page? Anyway, this will take a bit more research than the one day you allowed for discussion before you took it upon yourself to move this page. — Morder (talk) 07:48, February 18, 2010 (UTC) It should be moved to "Cardassian military" because the article talks about the military - as far as I can see, we have no separate page discussing the military as opposed to the Guard. Certainly, we can create two articles, but the evidence so far suggests that Cardassian Guard will merely be a one-liner - Gul Jasad was a member of the Cardassian Guard - so what's the point? I'm not saying that another contributor couldn't eventually surprise me and come up with solid proof that it is the same as the military, but until that happens it is much safer to stick to the generic term Cardassian military, which was used a lot on the show so it's canon, rather than risk popularizing the term Cardassian Guard out of proportion. One day is enough to assess this danger and the weakness of the evidence provided in the article. I also plan to search all of the scripts, though. – NotOfTheBody 08:08, February 18, 2010 (UTC) ::It's not a danger. Vandalism is a danger. This is just a few days to give people a chance to state their views much as you stated yours. Others may have statements that either a) contradict yours or b) offer an alternative you hadn't considered. — Morder (talk) 08:11, February 18, 2010 (UTC) Now you're being insulting by calling this vandalism. How is this vandalism? The article itself says that the term "Cardassian military" was usually used on the show. I agree, since I've watched all of the show at least twice. Vandalism would be renaming the article "The Spoonhead Gang" just for the fun of it. – NotOfTheBody 08:20, February 18, 2010 (UTC) ::I never said you vandalized. You stated "One day is enough to assess this danger and the weakness of the evidence provided in the article." - it's not dangerous and no immediate action is required. What is dangerous and requires immediate action is vandalism not this page move...seriously... — Morder (talk) 08:30, February 18, 2010 (UTC) Ok, I searched both TNG and DS9 scripts and couldn't find another reference to the Cardassian Guard, though there are many references to the Cardassian military. The article has been named Cardassian Guard since it was created six years ago, and its information has already spread to other sites. It is now extremely unlikely that someone can prove that the name Cardassian Guard is a better title than the safe term "Cardassian military". – NotOfTheBody 10:01, February 18, 2010 (UTC) :::Asking the creator of the article is a good idea, although they have not made any contributions here in almost six years, so they may not respond. :::I think that Morder is right and there should be two pages if there is no evidence this was intended as the formal name- the fact that this page would be short(only describing Jasad and what he did) does not matter as we have numerous short pages.--31dot 11:21, February 18, 2010 (UTC) ::::My only question here would be was the phrase "Cardassian Military, (number) Order", or something similar, used in a formal setting as well? From what I gathered the Cardassian Military is made up of the Guard, the Militia, and the Obsidian Order. - 13:00, February 18, 2010 (UTC) ::::: Frequency of usage is irrelevant. Formality takes priority in an encyclopedia, not commonality. Cardassian Guard is the only formal name given, thus takes precedence, the same applies to the Romulan Guard or . As long as a link to Cardassian military exists, that we are recognizing the informal usage, just like we recognize the informal overabundant usage of "Federation". --Alan 14:59, February 18, 2010 (UTC) Yes, but we have proof that United Federation of Planets = Federation. We have proof that Danube is the name of the runabout class (from "Hippocratic Oath"). On the other hand, the Romulan Guard article has the same problem as this one and I just started the same discussion over there. Formality must never take precedence over accuracy, otherwise we're stepping into fanfic. Look at our evidence again - there is no proof that Cardassian Guard is the name of the entire Cardassian military. If all we have is a name that sounds informal (though I doubt that it is merely an informal name), than that's all we have. The name Cardassian Guard is simply not bulletproof, since based on the quote above, it can just as well refer to a specific branch of the military. Here's a number of examples for the use of "Cardassian military" on DS9: :I don't interrogate members of the Cardassian military :my guess is that the soldiers that were left here, were part of some sort of Cardassian military experiment :It means that as a loyal officer of the Cardassian Military, I'm pledged to serve the legitimate ruling body of the Empire. :The Cardassian military has been so busy fending off the Klingons, ... Without the Cardassian military to stop them, the Maquis have a perfect opportunity ... :Do you have any idea how long it takes to decode a Cardassian military transmission? :We still control the Cardassian military, while Damar has only a handful of terrorists at his disposal. :Standard Cardassian military codes from six years ago, :You're welcome to file an official protest with the Cardassian military ... :It looks like a Cardassian military code, but the computer doesn't recognize it. :Or at least in the best interest of the Cardassian military. :Jomat Luson remembers Rugal being brought in by a Cardassian military officer. ... The relationship between the Guard, militias and orders isn't really relevant - if we're not sure whether certain units should be treated as part of the military, they can have their own articles. The point is that we need to find the most appropriate title for this particular article, and Cardassian Guard is not it based on available evidence. – NotOfTheBody 15:09, February 18, 2010 (UTC) It's been a couple of days already, and I don't think it's fair that the creator of the article can name it Cardassian Guard, provide only one ambiguous reference as evidence, but then I have to write paragraphs and paragraphs in order to demonstrate the obvious, namely that we have no proof that Cardassian Guard is the correct title and that Cardassian military, while generic, is also more of an appropriate title for the contents of the article. Logically, the article should be moved to the safe title immediately, and then it should be up to the supporters of Cardassian Guard to demonstrate that it really is the appropriate title, not the other way around. This particular approach is giving way too much power to the creator of the article. – NotOfTheBody 16:18, February 21, 2010 (UTC) ::::: This discussion is getting way too obsessive and overrated. Just chill. Everything will work itself out in time. --Alan 16:30, February 21, 2010 (UTC) While a title may seem like a small matter, it is setting a dangerous precedent - namely, that MA need not be rigorously logical and canon-derived, but that a consensus of often-nebulous personal views is more important, which is obviously why we have to wait for more people here to take interest (and they haven't, for six years). A lot of people don't like logic and research, so they prefer creating fanon works, where the requirements are not as stringent. Thus it is quite understandable why they're not really concerned about accuracy, the way they would be in the real world. Imagine that you're studying an ancient country called Cardassia, and you run upon a diary whose writer notes that he's "from the Cardassian guard". Are you going to stake your reputation in the scientific community on the assumption that the Cardassian guard is the entire military of that country? Or are you going to be mindful of your reputation and safely refer to it as the Cardassian military? Hopefully, it's the latter. But for whatever reason, simply because this is fiction, suddenly there is room for nebulous interpretation and a consensus of personal views, in other words, fanon and fan-fiction, since nobody here has the legal license to create Star Trek as far as I know. – NotOfTheBody 16:57, February 21, 2010 (UTC) :NOTB, while your crusade for correct usage is notable I would say that MA DOES need to be rigorously logical because it is based off of the real Memory Alpha. This is a repository of factual, canon information. If something hasn't existed in the canon world then quite frankly, it hasn't existed when it relates to in-world articles.--Obey the Fist!! 19:15, February 24, 2010 (UTC) I didn't say it need not be rigorously logical. I said, in response to allegations that this is getting obsessive and overrated: "While a title may seem like a small matter, it is setting a dangerous precedent - namely, that MA need not be rigorously logical". To me, this is as basic as writing an Encyclopedia Britannica article on the subject - would anyone dare stake their reputation on such an ambiguity? Thus it seems you agree with me - if we have no proof that Cardassian Guard is the name of the military in the canon world, we have no business making blatantly unproven and unqualified statements in various articles about all kinds of people other than Jasad serving in the Cardassian Guard. Call it "the Cardassian military", a mere generic designation, and that's it. – NotOfTheBody 19:44, February 24, 2010 (UTC) ::::I don't think my question from above was ever answered, or maybe I just missed it. Is there a reference to an Order being in the "Cardassian military"? - 22:28, February 24, 2010 (UTC) I wrote above: "The relationship between the Guard, militias and orders isn't really relevant - if we're not sure whether certain units should be treated as part of the military, they can have their own articles." If you think that the various numbered Orders are different from the regular military (which I haven't noticed on the show - only the Obsidian Order stands distinctly apart), feel free to research that and disassociate the individual Order articles from my proposed "Cardassian military" article if there is no proven connection. It wouldn't change the fact that only Jasad's Order was so far mentioned in connection with the Guard, so there is no proof that all the other Orders are associated with the Guard as well. I'm arguing only against the very blatant Guard assumption now - other relationships would require further research. – NotOfTheBody 23:26, February 24, 2010 (UTC) ::::I would say the relationship between the Orders and the "Cardassian military" is very relevant, as military actions have been mentioned as comprising segments of Orders, and we know at least one Order was part of the Cardassian Guard. I'll look into it, but I don't own any DS9 DVDs myself, so my research into this will be slow going, just fair warning. :) - 02:48, February 25, 2010 (UTC) I said it was mentioned along with the Guard, not that it was a part of it. Was the Order part of the Guard, or was the Guard part of the Order? Was Gul Jasad the only link between the two (he was a member of the Order and also the Guard?) We can speculate, but unfortunately there is nothing factual to go on since the writers stopped using the term Cardassian Guard. – NotOfTheBody 06:39, February 25, 2010 (UTC) :There does not seem to be any single "Order" in the sense you are discussing in any use in DS9. The uses of them all have numbers with them, with the exception of the Obsidian Order. "Fourth Order," "Third Order," etc. By numbering them, that makes them unit designations, not names for the entire organization. They are something like divisions, fleets, wings, etc. --OuroborosCobra talk 06:42, February 25, 2010 (UTC) Yes, we're talking about Jasad's Seventh Order and its relationship to the Guard. – NotOfTheBody 06:46, February 25, 2010 (UTC) :And? That's what I just responded to. While it helps to know I responded to the topic that I thought I responded to, I'm not sure what you think you are telling me... --OuroborosCobra talk 06:48, February 25, 2010 (UTC) Only that I abbreviated Seventh Order to Order in the comments about Jasad, since it is clear from the context; we've already established there are many numbered Orders. I agree they appear to be unit designations, but they can certainly have their independent articles if there are doubts (as expressed by Archduk3 above) about them being divisions of the Cardassian military. That doesn't mean they must be part of the Guard. – NotOfTheBody 06:57, February 25, 2010 (UTC) :They can have independent articles even if they ARE unit designations, doubts or not. We have articles for the Second Fleet and Star Fleet Battle Group Omega, we don't have them because we are unsure whether these are units of Starfleet or not. Jassad's identification establishes that the numbered Orders are part of the Guard. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:02, February 25, 2010 (UTC) How? "I am Gul Jasad from the Cardassian Guard, Seventh Order." Would you stake your reputation on this sentence? MA is supposed to report facts in the canon sections, not merely good guesses. – NotOfTheBody 07:09, February 25, 2010 (UTC) :It isn't a guess. He stated it. Thanks for posting the quote. --OuroborosCobra talk 07:15, February 25, 2010 (UTC) He stated that he is from the Cardassian Guard, comma, Seventh Order. You're not exactly going to write an academic paper for use by the Encyclopedia Britannica saying: "Based on my analysis of the comma and word order as used in that sentence, there is no doubt that all Cardassian numbered orders are part of the Cardassian Guard. I suggest using it in the encyclopedia as a fact." – NotOfTheBody 07:30, February 25, 2010 (UTC) :::NOTB, respectfully, aren't you overthinking this a little? We should use common sense here. Cobra is quite correct about what was stated. This isn't the Encyclopedia Britannica.--31dot 11:49, February 25, 2010 (UTC) ::This is hilarious now. NOTB, when someone states that they are from Philadelphia, PA it means they are from the city of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania. Hence, when Jasad says that he is from the Cardassian Guard, Seventh Order; it means he is a member of the Guard which is in the Seventh Order. I don't see how you can refut that. He would have stated the Guard AND the Order if they were two separate and unique entities. Describing it better: a US Air Force Airman is from the USAF, US Armed Forces. Does that mean it's two separate things? I think not. You jsut have to realize that, in this case, your argument does not stand up.--Obey the Fist!! 13:27, February 25, 2010 (UTC) ------ :::NOTB, respectfully, aren't you overthinking this a little? We should use common sense here. Cobra is quite correct about what was stated. This isn't the Encyclopedia Britannica.--31dot 11:49, February 25, 2010 (UTC) '' What does common sense have to do with writing any encyclopedia, which is based upon objective, peer-reviewed research? ::''This is hilarious now. NOTB, when someone states that they are from Philadelphia, PA it means they are from the city of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania. Hence, when Jasad says that he is from the Cardassian Guard, Seventh Order; it means he is a member of the Guard which is in the Seventh Order. '' No, this is hilarious, as 99% of this discussion has been utter insistence that "Cardassian Guard" should be assumed to refer to the entire military with all the orders, not the other way around. Obviously, a lot of people have a different interpretation of the sentence - as I said, it is ambiguous. Why should I be 100% convinced that the relationship between the Guard and the order in that sentence is exactly the same as between Philadelphia and PA? Do you dare check with a linguist? I can only conclude that you feel the liberty to fudge it because this is fiction, but in that case, MA is fan-fiction, since it need not be logically canon-derived. The consensus appears to be that "Cardassian Guard" feels good, the canon doesn't contradict it (although it doesn't support it either), so let's have fun and use it as the name of the military. No. Canonically, only the DS9 writing staff could've made such a decision, but they didn't choose to use ''Cardassian Guard, whatever the original intent was - instead, they chose to refer to the military in general as "the Cardassian military" and name/number only the individual orders and related units. ::I don't see how you can refut that. He would have stated the Guard AND the Order if they were two separate and unique entities. Describing it better: a US Air Force Airman is from the USAF, US Armed Forces. Does that mean it's two separate things? I think not. You jsut have to realize that, in this case, your argument does not stand up.--Obey the Fist!! 13:27, February 25, 2010 (UTC) I can refute that by saying there are a number of possibilities. He could've started with the name of the military (which would be more relevant to an outsider), then clarified the order. If CG is not the military, what if it's an elite unit which he proudly mentions first, and then the less important order? There are all kinds of combinations which need not be related to these analogies with the US, and we can spend day and night speculating about them. I'm not sure why everyone is so adamant that the Cardassian military must be named here, based on only one sentence. The writing staff obviously didn't really care about it, otherwise they would've used a name frequently enough to remove any ambiguity, and then we could've included it here without reservations. I'm frankly surprised that everyone here is willing to make such leaps of faith, which tells me that in practice, MA articles can easily turn into fan-fiction, depending on the prevailing consensus of personal opinions on a particular subject. Logic alone isn't enough to convince the administrators that a particular title is unsafe. – NotOfTheBody 18:08, February 25, 2010 (UTC) :It's not an elite unit, he named his unit, the Seventh Order. --OuroborosCobra talk 18:28, February 25, 2010 (UTC) And how do you know that an order cannot possibly be subdivided further into more specialized units? As I said, it's speculation. – NotOfTheBody 18:32, February 25, 2010 (UTC) This is getting WAY too long. Is there anyway of appeasing you NOTB?--Obey the Fist!! 20:16, February 25, 2010 (UTC) Easy: I'd like to move the article to Cardassian military without the administrators moving it back, edit the links in referencing articles so that they point to Cardassian military (except for those that really refer to the Guard mentioned by Jasad), and create a tiny article for the Guard, based only on Jasad's sentence above. The same applies to the Romulan Guard article. – NotOfTheBody 20:36, February 25, 2010 (UTC) ::::::I'm a little late to the game, but after reading through the whole wall of text above, I think there's a point to the suggestion. If all we have is a single statement ("I am Gul Jasad from the Cardassian Guard, Seventh Order."), then we can't conclude that "Cardassian Guard" is the name of the whole military. It might instead be a branch of the Cardassian military (like the Air Force or the Coast 'Guard are branches of the US Armed Forces). -- Cid Highwind 21:46, February 25, 2010 (UTC) ::::::OK, I have to rant a little: What the frak are you people doing? If you're the one who just changed two dozen pages, I'm also talking to you - but more important, if you're the one who did a blanket revert of all those edits, or if you're the one that didn't participate in this discussion at all and still claimed "consensus hasn't been reached", or if you're the one who basically claims that consensus is more important than any adherance to our content guidelines - then I'm aiming at you, now. I repeat, what the frak? ::::::I completely understand that, ten days ago, a move of the page content has been reverted as being "too quick". I do not understand that, ten days later, the same happens again. Where is the evidence that "military" and "Guard" are exactly one and the same? And if there isn't, what is a good reason for not moving the page now (and eventually moving it back if new evidence comes up)? It's not as if any content is being deleted during this move... Stop being destructive, and start being constructive about this. All sides... -- Cid Highwind 21:19, February 28, 2010 (UTC) ---- ::::::OK, I've calmed down a little - but I'm still annoyed that this premature back and forth has led to a situation where a whole bunch of articles is in a completely chaotic shape and form. The various "Order" articles now randomly claim that Orders are subgroups of either "the military" or "the Guard", and the same problem probably exists on several other articles related to this topic. I can only hope that everyone (from both sides) involved in this debacle is going to help resolving it one way or another. If not, I'm going to propose reverting all of NOTB's edits regarding this topic - not because I think he's wrong, but despite thinking he's right. It's better to have the same "wrong" title on all pages than to have several different titles randomly scattered across the project. ::::::So, what can be done to resolve this? First of all, keep in mind that a majority vote here does not overrule what has been stated in the episodes. If it stated that the Guard is the military, or is a subgroup of it, or has nothing to do with it - or if nothing at all has been stated - then so be it. The same can be said about the Orders. Has it been stated that orders are direct subgroups of the military? Or the Guard? Or both? Or neither? What we need is actual quotes - about the military, about the Guard, about individual Orders, about the relationship of all these things. Please help collecting that sort of stuff, so that we can find out what's really happening here. :) -- Cid Highwind 17:56, March 1, 2010 (UTC) :One point, the person claiming there wasn't consensus was in fact involved in the discussion here. --OuroborosCobra talk 19:30, March 1, 2010 (UTC)